Archive for February, 2009

Schumpeter on Capitalism & Socialism

Saturday, February 28th, 2009

Joseph Schumpeter was an extremely gifted economist who predicted what we see now:

Schumpeter’s most popular book in English is probably Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. This book opens with a treatment of Karl Marx. While he is sympathetic to Marx’s theory that capitalism will collapse and will be replaced by socialism, Schumpeter concludes that this will not come about in the way Marx predicted. To describe it he borrowed the phrase “creative destruction,” and made it famous by using it to describe a process in which the old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by new ways.

Schumpeter’s theory is that the success of capitalism will lead to a form of corporatism and a fostering of values hostile to capitalism, especially among intellectuals. The intellectual and social climate needed to allow entrepreneurship to thrive will not exist in advanced capitalism; it will be replaced by socialism in some form. There will not be a revolution, but merely a trend in parliaments to elect social democratic parties of one stripe or another. He argued that capitalism’s collapse from within will come about as democratic majorities vote for the creation of a welfare state and place restrictions upon entrepreneurship that will burden and destroy the capitalist structure. Schumpeter emphasizes throughout this book that he is analyzing trends, not engaging in political advocacy. In his vision, the intellectual class will play an important role in capitalism’s demise. The term “intellectuals” denotes a class of persons in a position to develop critiques of societal matters for which they are not directly responsible and able to stand up for the interests of strata to which they themselves do not belong. One of the great advantages of capitalism, he argues, is that as compared with pre-capitalist periods, when education was a privilege of the few, more and more people acquire (higher) education. The availability of fulfilling work is however limited and this, coupled with the experience of unemployment, produces discontent. The intellectual class is then able to organise protest and develop critical ideas.

Pinochet and Franco found a workaround to this problem for a time: dig a big ditch and put all the liberal intellectuals and assorted Communists in it.  But they came back in a generation, implying the problem is intractable by simple murder, even if such an option were moral.

Absent a thorough moral defense of wealth and inequality, and a meta-political-market able to sustain such a defense, a false religion of guilt and sentimentality takes over and undermines the very capital that makes our relative prosperity as moderns possible.

Throwing the Baby Out With the Macroevolutionary Bathwater

Tuesday, February 17th, 2009

Great post over at TakiMag concerning the self-defeating efforts of conservatives to dismiss Darwin’s insights:

I too am often disappointed that pundits on the pseudo-Right seek to undermine an insight that could strengthen their alleged worldview.  It’s no surprise that lurking below Intelligent Design there is an appeal to a form of universalism (and all its attendant condemnations), not unlike pro-life activists invoking civil-rights rhetoric and modern Christians championing universal human rights.

http://www.takimag.com/sniperstower/art … tionalism/

The fact that some extreme atheists use Darwinism as a sort of religion to explain ultimate origins does not excuse Christians who invoke the equally atheistic spirit of the French Revolution to attack it.  Both are lies.  And as I’ve pointed out before, all of the practical, political implications of Darwinism are microevolutionary in nature:

2008/12/13/intelligent-design-vs-evolution-a-conclusion/

When poor people with two-digit IQ’s are given the right to immigrate and vote on politicians who then decide how to tax the greater property and income of those with three-digit IQ’s, whom they outnumber, democracy becomes a farce of two wolves voting themselves a lamb for dinner.  When those differences are largely genetic and intractable, and those with less wealth have higher birthrates, we have a recipe for a very unstable society, on its way to the logical progression of multiculturalism: from the First World to crony-corrupt Mexico, from Mexico to racial-socialist Venezuela, from Venezuela to the affirmative-action-state (and world rape capital) of South Africa, from South Africa to the lawless murders, rapes, stealing and mass inflation of Zimbabwe, and from Zimbabwe to the permanent abyss of Haiti.

But hey, it feels good to rant about Hitler and Darwin, right?

Rocky in 60 Seconds

Sunday, February 1st, 2009

So my wife refuses to watch any Rocky movies, despite my telling her how vitally important they were to my development from boy to man.  She says she would rather see people kill each other than hit each other.  The boxing movie and the dog movie (i.e. the ability of an Old Yeller or Where the Red Fern Grows to make a grown man cry who never gets choked up at typical romantic fare) seem to be male phenomena.  That’s why this commercial caught my eye:

YouTube Preview Image

I don’t know about you, but that really grabbed me by the gut.

This is the type of story you never see in the media anymore, but was a staple of John Wayne movies: the triumph of the strong, silent Westerner over the show-off braggart.  And it was made by a German beer company: don’t they know Germans aren’t supposed to do stuff like that anymore?

And have you noticed that the media ignores heavyweight boxing now that big dudes from Eastern Europe dominate the would-be Mike Tysons?  Here are the current belt-holders:

WBA WBC IBF WBO
(a)Nikolai Valuev Vitali Klitschko Wladimir Klitschko Wladimir Klitschko
YouTube Preview Image

In any case, a decent dose of boxing or other types of fighting sports (UFC, etc) is an important part of bringing up boys in my opinion.  They’ll be feminized enough by the culture, if not the church.